MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2769846096 · doi:10.14453/ltc.740

Making Sense of Minor Jurisprudence

2017· article· en· W2769846096 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueLaw/text/culture · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean and International Law Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsMinor (academic)JurisprudenceSense (electronics)LawPolitical scienceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay attempts to understand ‘Minor Jurisprudence’, to articulate some of its senses and resonances. It does so, first, by looking into the emergence of ‘Minor Jurisprudence’ out of the ‘Law As…’ symposia, particularly Christopher Tomlins’ reflections thereon. It does so, second, by looking into ‘Minor Jurisprudence’ as a modification of the ‘minor literature’ Deleuze and Guattari coin or borrow from Kafka in their reading of him. There are underexplored resonances between some of the language and thinking tied to the emergence of ‘Minor Jurisprudence’ out of the ‘Law As…’ symposia and the language and thinking of Deleuze and Guattari. Indeed, when one looks into Deleuze and Guattari’s ‘minor literature’, one even finds a ‘minor jurisprudence’, one that merits attention as ‘Law As…’ grows up into ‘Minor Jurisprudence’.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.880

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.318 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it